contentious, we haue no suche custome, neyther the Churches of God. Whereas he pur∣posely speaketh of such, as be contentious for externall matters: wherevpon that is grounded that Bullinger saith: That those be contentious, which trouble and deuide the church for externall things. And that also, whiche Zuinglius in his book de baptismo, spea∣king of contentious Anabaptistes, writeth: They goe about innouations of their owne priuate authoritie in those Churches where the Gospell is truly taught, and that in externall things. And in his Ecclesiastes he calleth them authours of contentions, and troublers of the church, which striue about externall matters. And surely this is an euident token that the accusation is true, bicause they and their companions (for the mosre parte) make contention wheresoeuer they come, and especially in those places where the Gospell hath with most diligence bin taught, as experiēce sufficiently proueth. Furthermore the time and maner of publishing their pamphlets, argueth ye same most euidently.
The truth and necessitie of those things for the which they contend, rest as yet in triall. Surely if they be matters necessarie to saluation, then is there some iust cause of breking the peace of the Church for them, but if they be matters of no such weight, then can you not excuse eyther your selfe, or them.
In déed the Papists haue no iust matter of reioycing, for they disagrée both in me, & also in far greater matters thā these be, euen in ye chiefest points of their religion: but this is no sufficient excuse for vs, we may not disagrée in truth, bicause they disagrée in error. Neither ought the weak to be offended, bicause such cōtentions haue bin v∣sual in the Church, as I haue also shewed in myne Epistle dedicatorie to the Churche of England. But yet wo be vnto those by whome suche offences come.